Idaho Reports; Envirosafe

The funding for this program is provided by the Corporation for Public Broadcasting and the friends of four 10 and 12 concern continues to mount over possible safety violations at this toxic waste disposal site in a wadi County. And we find out now that EPA and the state have known about these violations documented for as long as a year without having fulfilled their requirement to. Prosecute the violators the state having been there had failed. Not in my opinion taking the proper measures to determine whether there had been any contaminants that could have left the site tonight. What danger exists at the enviros safe site. Good evening. The seventh despairs will of toxic wastes literally millions of tons of dangerous chemicals every year. It is generally thought to be the most serious

environmental problem in the country today. And now some suspect that the toxic waste disposal danger has come to Idaho in a serious way by virtue of a 117 acre hazardous waste disposal site in a Wahi County in southwestern Idaho. Local residents are upset about possible safety violations at the facility. And Congressman Larry Craig is now pressing the Environmental Protection Agency for more information on the leaking of some hazardous material at that site in August. Leaking apparently due to a flash flood. EPA itself has in the last year cited the facility for 57 separate violations and now it's been confirmed that groundwater which has been discovered within one hundred eighty feet beneath the trenches in that disposal site is raising the possibility that water in the area could be contaminated. At this point it seems much easier to pose questions about the safety of the enviro safe site than it is to produce answers to those questions. One thing we do know for sure is the site which is located in a Wahi County near the community of Granby about 70 miles

south of Boise is a major depository in the western US for the most dangerous pesticides in PCBs. Yesterday I dove Republican congressman Larry Craig whose district includes the enviro safe site toured the facility and met yesterday afternoon with reporters. And while it's been said for a long time that the site is one of the safest in the nation it was obvious that Congressman Craig had some concerns. The issue of a flood that occurred some time on August 20th or the 22nd at the very safe and hazardous waste disposal site in a wacky County has brought. A great deal of concern on the part of citizens of a wacky County and other areas. Craig went on to detail for reporters his own concerns about the enviro safe site. There is no requirement that there be a 24 hour person or that there be 24 hour personnel on site at this hazardous waste facility. And I will tell you that this is a major hazardous

waste facility for the entire western region of the United States. I find also there seems to be a conflict as to who has certain kinds of responsibilities as it relates to making a determination a violation or an adequate procedure being carried out completely on the part of the operators. I think the case in point has to be a state of Idaho going to the site determining that there had been major runoff and yet failing to recognize the potential human safety factors involved in walking away without taking a test. There is another concern that I think demonstrates a failure to delineate proper regulations as it deals with these kinds of sites. One of the waivers they were granted was a groundwater waiver from the hydrological studies that said water was at the twenty three to twenty eight hundred foot level. When I first heard that in July I began to question very strongly the feasibility of

saying that there was no active or ground water of which we should be concerned about at any reasonable level near the site. I think that in the last few days my concern has been confirmed in the fact that well drilling on the site has discovered ground water 180 foot level and that there are numerous irrigation wells around the area within visual distance of the site. That pump abundant irrigation water from the two to four hundred foot level is very hard for me to believe that there is not surface or reasonable groundwater in the area that we have to be concerned about as it relates to possible leaching and ultimate contamination. I would have to believe that it could be established that the ground water was contaminated that major port shutting that Craig is not alone in his concern about possible safety violations at the enviro safe site last year by the way it disposed of 12000 metric tons of

dangerous materials. Dr Charles Scott a toxicologist and former EPA inspector who used to visit the Awadi County site frequently told producer Gary Richardson today there is plenty to be worried about. Is there a serious cause for alarm about the conditions out of the Grandview site. At this time the information would appear to be serious due to the fact that the state has refused to take samples at the time that they could get the most information. And then with the system such that anything they do find out the public is the last to know about this and so based on the ground water level now being only a hundred eighty feet and that many of these violations that have been cited to those people are Class 1 violations indicating an immediate threat to the human health and environment. Yes they have concerns. We're concerned that without a constant inspectors surveillance out there on a weekly basis that these violations will continue and it's only a matter of time. Before

someone or some major accident happens that could do damage to our citizens of the state of Idaho specifically right violations have been committed out there. Well there's about 57 violations of major violations that fall in the class 1 violations probably only a half a dozen but different aspects of each individual violation adds up to 57. A letter has been addressed to Mr. Ruckelshaus head of EPA and to our congressman outlining these regulations infractions that we feel have been taking place and we find out now that EPA and the state have known about these violations documented for as long as a year without having fulfilled their requirement to prosecute the violators. And so we're concerned that that continues. And this is why that we're asking for a complete investigation. The spokespeople for and virus safe have said that these violations were either administrative or bookkeeping types of details and EPA has said that none of them were serious threats to health.

I have a letter here from United States Environmental Protection Agency the enforcement division. And in here they outline class 1 class 2 and class 3 violations. Class 1 violations 1 class 1 violations occur a direct and continuing threat to health and the environment is posed. Some of these violations include in these violations that are listed here are the ones that EPA had been notified about as well as the state. In February the twenty one thousand eighty three. And again in August of 83 this year prior to that flood that occurred out there. So with full knowledge of this the people are concerned out there that EPA in the state just for some reason refuses to respond to their own regulations that require the site to operate in a safe manner. What specific problems are there out there. When the flash flood took place out there on August the 20th they're required to notify both the state an EPA immediately and calling the operation their contingency plan

their contingency plan has been written up in three pages here for violations not having one adequate to respond. Not having have the people trained in order to utilize their particular training in whatever aspect is needed to respond to that contingency plan. They did not have a berm around the site that required to keep run on and run off from taking place. And then the new part B that we just sent in says that they're not going to put up a berm. So we're concerned that all of these violations could not only offer a threat to the existing residents but the immediate 20 people working on side. But the people of Idaho at the Keep in mind that a white county is a long way from where they live and it's a small community down there. But these same trucks trance verse large cities throughout the state coming in from other states before they ever get to Mountain Home Granby and Bruno. So one of these trucks could just as well turn over in Idaho Falls OR CALL well. And the way our system exists in the state of Idaho now who would

respond who would take the responsibility if one of those trucks were to catch on fire the Motown or the cafe or at a truck stop. It's apparent that there's some confusion as to who has the ride and the and willing to respond to a given accident and mediately in order to ensure the safety of the residents of state of Idaho. We invited a representative of enviros safe to appear on this program and discuss the questions that have been raised about the operation of their facility. They company declined our invitation to appear tonight. We do have our birth officials from both the state and federal agencies that now share the responsibility for monitoring safety at the waste disposal site in the Wahid County. Dr. Lee Starks is administrator of the division of environment with the Idaho Department of Health and Welfare. And Steve provided as an Environmental Protection Agency official in the agency's Boise office Dr. Stokes let me begin with you. As we sit here tonight is there a reason for people to be concerned about public safety public health because of the n virus safe site.

I think if people were concerned I'd be concerned about them. Because there's been a lot of a lot of press suggesting that there have been violations at the site. There's there's also no question that there are some difficulties associated with transportation of material like that through the state. I have some concerns of my own about the lack of regulation that exists both at the federal and state level about transportation of interest. Terril as far as the site itself goes I don't for the moment believe that there's any reason that people should be. Concerned about health hazards. There is no information that I have right now that would suggest that there are health hazards affecting people at this time. On the other hand if the company involved does not change their ways in terms of their dealing with the details of the regulations then I think everybody should become more concerned.

Ok I'll come back to that point a minute. Mr. President do you want to take a try at that one. People should people be concerned is there an immediate reason for concern about health care. I don't think there's an immediate concern for health. I think as Dr. Stokes said we need to make certain that Yes-I is meeting the letter of the regulations you size the company. Yes. Right. OK. And that. If we do find infractions we need to carry out adequate enforcement against those so that we can prevent any threat and innocent becoming our potential health hazard before it does. So are you saying both of you that the company at this point hasn't done a very good job in meeting the letter of some of the regulations some of the requirements that both your agencies place upon them. Dr. Stokes I think it's been erratic for sure. Certainly there have been a lot of violations of the paperwork kind. And since we

have our normal six month formal inspection schedule this month we'll be taking a detailed look at those aspects right away. But as far as actual mechanical problems at the site that would result in an actual exposure of the public to those things that was those have been few and in fact I'm not aware of anything that that has been directly shown to have caused that nature a problem. I think based on past inspections that we've made at the site we have issued a notice of violation to yes I think that's what Dr.. Scott was referring to when he said the 57 violations that are listed in our letter to them are those violations I think we've allowed them to deal with them through their part B application which is a permitting process that they're going through now they are presently operating under in what is called interim

status. I want to get on down the bureaucratic stuff here. We were just in a nutshell what they're doing is they're operating under a temporary permit that they that they have to make permanent or want to make permanent by December of this year right. Yes. OK let me just go back for a moment to this health question which seems to a journalist to be the most important to the public to be the most the most important the most interesting perhaps director Scott said on that videotape Mr. provided that there have been violations called so-called Class 1 violations which EPA says mean a direct and continuing threat to the health and environment. OK I think the one violation that we're dealing with them on that we were we considered a class 1 violation is with regard to their groundwater waiver and we were quiet that they obtained additional information to substantiate that the twenty eight hundred foot to ground water is or is not accurate based on recent data they've drilled one

hole out there where it showed has shown that there was a groundwater one hundred eighty feet they're going to have to drill more wells to better define the how the water lies underneath the site. That one they are supposed to respond to us within 30 days. The letter that was sent to them was dated on September 8. We've given them a two week extension I understand it now because of this information showing that the water was at 100 feet. So one of the reasons Now let me just make sure I understand this one of the reasons that that site is always thought to be to be a good one was because the ground water was so deep if you will if you go 3000 feet down before you ran into the water now you're saying that there's been water found at one hundred eighty feet below where some of this material is disposed by the original permit that was issued to them. The took into account vailable information at that time and it did show that water. Was it a depth of about twenty eight hundred twenty nine hundred feet and there was significant layers of clay between the surface and the ground water.

That may or may not be accurate based on the recent more recent information that were fine but if it were accurate that would be pretty serious as Congressman Craig said. If what were if the water were at 100 80 80 feet okay they could still operate that site. It would mean that they would have to put in impenetrable liner in the trenches. They would have to monitor ground water and to demonstrate that nothing is reaching ground water. Say if if sampling shows a there is already contamination of the ground water at 180 feet then we would have to look very seriously as to whether or not that is an adequate site for hazardous waste. Mr. Stokes back to Dr. Stokes back to this August incident that Congressman Greg mentioned where there was a flash flood on the site. He said the state failed to follow up with adequate inspections. Having not discussed the matter with him directly I'm not exactly sure what he means by that but some

of what I've seen in the press suggests that. Perhaps we should have taken some samples either on the site or or off the site where runoff obviously occurred. That's in fact the only specific allegation where we did go to the site as soon as we knew about it. Certainly wish we had known about it sooner. And if the regular company's fault that you did Norman I wouldn't say it's their fault because they're not required to be there on the weekends. That's not to say that the regulations aren't frail but they're not required to and so they didn't notify us until Monday morning then we were there. The visual observation by our field inspector revealed to him that water could not have left the actual trenches and then overflowed from the property that. There would have been water coming off the general staging area. At the facility and then off the property. He assumed that there would be there for some trace contamination

just from what's tracked around by the trucks and what have you. That would be normal but that there could not have been any really significant amount of material to leave the property. So it was his judgment call not to take samples that could be second guessed but that it was your inspector's judgment call that's right and and that's the determination he made he did go back and take some later for the purpose of getting some background information for the future. But one other one point that should be made for what it's worth is that meaningful analyses of samples of that kind cost over a thousand dollars to run is not the kind of thing that you just do at the drop of a hat. Especially when the visual observations suggest that they were there would be no meaningful information gain here. OK let me ask you just real quickly and finally there seems to be a good deal of confusion about just who does what and when they do it in these circumstances. I don't know how to put it to you. Do you guys have it straight as to who does what and when you do it.

You were operating under a cooperate arrangement with the state of Idaho and in an instance like this I think where the state didn't take a sample we. I guess disagreed with the state to some degree and and one of our inspectors went down and did do some sampling and as a group direct result of the flash flood event. So I guess maybe things aren't defined as well as they should be as to who does what when but are you working on that. Yes we are. Yes that Stokes certainly we are working on that and I think under a cooperative agreement it can't ever be defined well enough. The state as I imagine you know is working on a proposal for an actual delegation of the full program to the state. You take overall the response of yes we would take over all the responsibilities and then it would be quite clear under the current arrangement I don't think that's really possible that all would be holes in it.

Welcome back gentlemen thank you. Residents who live near the environmental sites have been concerned about its safety in a weekly newspaper in a wadi County has regularly called for tougher regulations dealing with hazardous waste in the state. The newspaper's editor is Mick Hodges. Mr Hedges are people really starting to worry out there aren't they. What's their concern. Well I think their concerns are many of the people of white county have been telling state officials and federal officials for the last 10 years that that's flash flood country. I told the legislature this spring that that was flash flood country that we're going to have problems well this fall a small cloudburst hit the dump. It was not a large one this was about a three on a scale of 10 and we saw damage and we saw the lack of follow up. I'd like to disagree a little bit on the field inspectors for I'm going to take that sample.

Let me just let me just before you do that I promise I'll give you a chance to do that they just want to try to get at what people are. I read a quote from one new woman are quoted in the newspaper who said if there were a vote you know why you county would be overwhelming to close that place well it's very it's very for the public and you look. If you look at a hundred eighty foot groundwater which again people have been telling them that there was groundwater levels similar to that all around that thing for a number of years those missile silos are sunk down a hundred sixty foot. They're full of the most nightmarish brew of liquids known to man. The reaction of the acids the sort of chemistry on that permeable concrete liners unknown. So we've put this volume of chemicals 20 foot over a router level. I think they're going to find that water level closer to one hundred fifteen hundred thirty feet. So you've got you've got these concrete silo sitting right in the water level. OK once it's dirty What do we do. You you heard the experts here you talk about what the state

and the federal government is doing. Or do you don't feel any better I guess about what you heard. Well not a toll it's we can see what's being done we don't need to be told time and time again we can see it. Darryl cook the inspector that went out after the flood Well first of all yes I did not notify either the EPA or the state Division of environment. A white county officials notified them that's a violation of regulation. There I got on that site and said there was not indication that chemicals had had left the facility. They had done major major Caterpillar heavy equipment work to rebuild that berm so it was impossible to tell that whole corner that had very likely washed out and had been repaired. By the time the state got out there. When the a white county commissioners arrives along with the sheriff there were very clear. There was very clear evidence all over that site the chemicals had skate there were many many rivets of say camp tan a paint treatment they use on crops. You could see that all over the place and it was outside the confines of the content.

You know you were there and yes you saw. That's right. Again this was not a inspector's Brockie this is regulation and the regulation was ignored. Well who's dropping the ball here. The regulatory agencies both the state of the state and EPA. Yes well let me open it up and go back to both Mr. Preval and Dr. Stokes Hodges watch this for a long time he says You both are dropping the ball. Well without being an apologist for the company and I certainly don't intend to be one. The regulation that I believe that Roger is referring to is not that clear. Unfortunately the regulation allows that company a fair amount of judgment on their own as to whether or not the situation. Suggest that the department or EPA should be informed and they can exercise some of their own judgement about whether the situation has been serious enough that they need to call you. That's right. That's that's one of the steps that everybody assumed had already been taken

is that is that there was some sort of emergency. The company is essentially allowed by the regulation to make that determination themselves. They determined. To their own satisfaction anyway that nothing had left the property and therefore they don't have to make any such notification. Mr. Hyde you Mark look at these pictures. You determine if there was an emergency or not there's a steel chain link fence. It was powerful enough to push over a cement incased 10 foot steel fence post besides pushing the fence over you'll know major major erosion. You decide. Did did well it looks pretty serious to the company that the culture of the company that you want to own the company here to call or should somebody have been as Congressman Craig I think was suggesting more regular inspections certainly Dr Scott was suggesting on the videotape more regular inspections. That's a that's a very good question it was brought up at our Burnell hearing by the woman that lives right directly below the waist down. She was in tears very upset she said

whose responsibility is it to notify us. My children are playing in this creek our well is several feet from the creek. We didn't know this flash flood occurred until we read in the paper. She said Don't those people know we live down there and they said no we don't. So it's a very good question. What kinds of inspections are taking place there now on a regular basis. Mr. Brown or the state inspects a facility on a formal basis twice a year. And then there are a number of other times where our inspectors have gone down the state has gone down to inspect specific things that might have happened down there or waste loads of cum on it that were leaking just to just in a nutshell is there enough inspection. I don't think so no. Well I agree with that I don't believe there has been enough inspection. One of the reasons has been that upon Dr Scott's written resignation from EPA has been assigned to the state we were without one of our inspectors for a year. We have since filled a position and will be back to

their current capabilities of full strength but during that period we really had only one person who could add to divide his time between other kinds of EPA required activities such as training and the inspection work at NASA and all of the generators which we can't forget we have to inspect also. So certainly during that period there was not enough. And due to the some of the current information that we're learning such as they are the water that has been discovered at the hundred foot level that there is definitely a need to go down a lot more often. Mr. Mr. Rogers as you sit here tonight are you worried that there has been already or could be some serious contamination that could be a public health hazard. Well again I don't need to make any judgments let's just look at the situation. Again you've got Nestle sidles 160 foot deep over 100 an 80 foot water level. And you determine they're full of every known.

Poisonous waste that that man has created. They don't know what's out there. Was Khan was fined for improper disposal there. They're finding all kinds of goodies buried out there. Well just quickly what would you what's what should be done now what needs to be done now needs to be closed Superfund brought in those trenches pumped once once this stuff gets into the aquifer which it probably already has one. How do you clean it up then. So you're flat out for closing the place today tomorrow. OK. You know that storks and you just know that I would just like to say quickly that that wouldn't be possible under the weight of the current. First of all there has been no determination that there is water under the silo. It's that's pretty unlikely because of the wells that were drilled originally for the silo show short of being closing the facility at this point is not something that we need to tackle I don't think it's possible. Even if it were desirable. OK I'm sorry we're out of time we're going to have to leave it there Mr. Rogers Mr. Lott.

Dr. Stokes we thank you for joining us tonight. We'll be back tomorrow. I'm Mark Johnson. The funding for this program is provided by the Corporation for Public Broadcasting and the friends of four 10 and 12. The officials from that if it got much worse than it is today it was it would be a very major role. I think the most important thing for the elections this November will be how have we done relative to what we said or do we being the administration and speaking for that. Well I think they have reduced inflation I think they have increased savings I think they have shown leadership in this world that was

lacking from this country in the past I think they've shown the mastic leadership. I think that will be due positively by the American people. Thank you we are out of time thank you joining us tonight. That's all for tonight we'll be back here tomorrow night with a look at some of the week's events. I'm Jean McNeil. Good night. This program is produced by id TV which is solely responsible for its content. Funding for the reporters as provided by friends of Channel 4 incorporated and the Corporation for Public Broadcasting. In the news this week some new developments in the saga of downtown Boise. The Fish and Game Commission

says it will fight to propose dams on the Snake River and a commission on excellence in education has some sweeping recommendations. I'm Jean McNeil analysis of those and other stories. Tomorrow night on the reporters at 7:00 following MacNeil-Lehrer Report.